Hollsworth On Frederick
VCU’s Bob Hollsworth on Jeff Frederick:
But this is what baffles me about the Frederick story.
What would a win look like?
The party rules say that his detractors need to have 75% of the vote at the smackdown to remove him.
What if they fail by one vote or a couple of votes?
Is this a win? Would he declare victory if only 74% of the Central Committee voted to remove him?
Unless every report I”ve read is seriously wrong about the likely final count, it appears that Frederick is in a no-win” situation.
He is either booted out or he stays on after an effective vote of no confidence.
This really isn’t much of a choice.
Category: Campaigns and Elections
Loading ...
You know, the same can also be said for SCC. What is a win for them? Obviously if they remove Jeff with an overwhelming majority that is easy to determine. But if they fail to remove Jeff by 1-2 votes they will have practically castrated themselves. If they manage to remove him with just 1-2 votes, it looks like they muscled their outcome and that the powerful “few” are dictating the will of the grassroots (afterall, appearances/perception are everything in this arena).
No matter what the reasons for pursuing this and whose side you are on in this battle, the timing of it all is absolutely asinine. If Jeff is inept and incompetent like his dissenters claim, they should have just worked around him (like they were planning on doing with Gillespie) and dealt with this after November (or perhaps not at all depending on which camp you are in). This WILL play out as grassroots versus establishment, no matter how hard one tries otherwise. I realize that there are many legitimate grassroot activists (and conservatives) who are supporting Jeff’s removal (many who are my good friends), but perception is everything and it will be viewed as grassroots versus establishment. All the politicians weighing in didn’t help discount that perception.
Speaking strictly from a perspective of pollitical strategy only (and not right versus wrong), this was the dumbest move EVER imho. We complain about the dumb things Jeff has done (e.g. Twitter incident) but this blows that out of the water. It is like deciding the best thing to do before a marathon is to amputate your legs. Unbelievable!
If Jeff wins at all, the outcome is a bit less gloomy than Hollsworth paints. It will make the allegations look empty. Frederick supporters will become even more rabid and active. It will be their mission to make him succeed despite the efforts of the giant snow job that almost destroyed the RPV.
Many of the “snowed” will realize they were “had”, and likely welcomed back with forgiveness.
Beyond that, some things will radically change. Many of Frederick’s attackers will be effectively neutered. If he makes it throught THIS, what could they possibly do to him later? The balance will have been tipped and Frederick can actually get more done.
[...] wrote earlier this week some thoughts I’d been having as well (shared earlier today here on Bearing Drift): But this is what baffles me about the Frederick [...]
Jamie Radtke:
I think both you and the Hollsworth are exactly right. This is why I believe that the smart move for SCC if they successfully remove Jeff is to name a caretaker Chairman and give the Convention another shot at naming a Chairman to fill the rest of Jeff’s term.
We touched on this on another blog, but to reiterate, my interpretation of the Party Plan is that we can and must have a Chairman vote at Convention in May.
I’m thinking that the only way to heal the party is to get a really big, beloved name drafted at Convention, even if it’s a figurehead who leaves most of the day-to-day business of the party to the Executive Director. Maybe George Allen. Maybe Randy Forbes. Maybe Eric Cantor. Maybe Bill Bolling.
Aaron, having a figurehead that some Frederick backers like won’t heal anything. A figure head or the puppet that Frederick is being attacked for not being won’t satisfy.
Further, not many Frederick backers will accept a Frederick attacker even as a figure head. You might as well dispell any notion of Cantor or Forbes. Cantor should be an obvious bad pick. Forbes however, did sign on also to remove Frederick. Forbes just wasn’t as noisy about it.
Britt: You may be right. So, is there anybody left who is universally admired in Virginia GOP politics?
Removing Jeff is still a big “IF” even with the imense pressure and curent numbers in the SCC.
Polling for acceptable candidates would be the responsibilty of those that fire him. You may not be correct that they even give a rat’s behind what Frederick backers think.
Is there even a provision for succession in the party plan in cases like this? I don’t know. I’m not even sure your suggestion is possible. Just offering my opinion of what you suggested.
Britt: This is the relevant excerpt from the RPV Party Plan…
“A vacancy in the office of State Chairman shall be filled by the State Central Committee until the next regular State Convention, which shall then elect a State Chairman to fill the remaining unexpired portion of the term of the vacating State Chairman.”
My point here is that the choice of who should fill the rest of Jeff’s term (should he be removed) really belongs to the Convention, not the SCC. The SCC can only fill the slot until Convention.
The most likely scenario is that SCC will pick someone they like, and the entire RPV establishment (SCC + elected officials) will try to pressure the Convention into ratifying their choice. I’m trying to figure out the best way for the Convention to take the opportunity assert its will, notwithstanding what SCC wants.
Aaron – And Jeff, if removed, can take his fight to the convention floor if he wants.
Jason — Yes, Jeff can run again for Chairman, and it wouldn’t surprise me if he did. So you would have the SCC candidate, probably with Bob McDonnell and the SCC pressuring the Convention to ratify their choice, and you would have Jeff Frederick, running his conservative grassroots anti-establishment campaign. This is a recipe for an ugly Convention, no matter who wins.
Thus my question is, who could be drafted at the Convention that would rise above these two factions and get (nearly) everybody’s approval, and unite the party going into November?
Well, you also have to consider that most of the delegates are already filed so Frederick isn’t filling the house with anyone. Nor is there the same kinda set up that existed last year between Gilmore and Marshall supporters. Frederick would have to rely on Bolling’s delegates and whoever shows up for the AGs and I really don’t think it’s there – unless he tries to fill with room with after the fact “delegates” and a very loud few.
But it does certainly set the stage for something ugly. Still, I get the sense that most people who have signed on are of the “anyone but Jeff” mentality.
Jason — What on earth makes you think that most people who have signed on are of the “anybody but Jeff” mentality?
Attendence at the Convention is being driven by the AG contest, which is becoming a game of Who’s the Most Conservative. There’s no reason Jeff wouldn’t play to that crowd.
I assume that Cuccinelli will come into the Convention with a plurality of the delegates. While Cuccinelli hasn’t taken sides in this, my read is that Cuccinelli people tend to be Frederick people.
Also of interest: While the AG candidates are staying out of the Frederick / SCC fight, if there’s a Chairman’s race, there’s no reason the AG candidates wouldn’t start taking sidesif they saw an advantage.